Re: Firefox 57 etc


Brian's Mail list account <bglists@...>
 

I partly agree, but there is also a push to try to get web developers to make sites accessible while they still can use newer ways of working for the sighted. Modern coding after all allows one to read the details of the browser in use by the visitor and its not beyond the wit of any developer to be adaptive. Pandering to every little change will start to unravel the standards that guide development.
I am already finding sighted friends telling me we no long want bells a whistles on web sites, we want something fast and easy to use, why do they keep on redesigning what has already proved to work.
The new lamps for old thing was a war of getting folks attention in those halcyon days of the start of the web, but now its seen as a tool and not such a showpiece of how clever the site builder is, or should be.
Brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@ripco.com>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2017 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox 57 etc


Exploits are only one reason these changes are being made. Wasn't it to this list that an article was sent yesterday from a site that specializes in accessibility issues explaining why old methods must be replaced by newer ones? As sites become increasingly interactive, the old methods are increasingly inadequate. I just remembered the name of the site. It's Marcos Accessibility blog. (spelling)) Evidently, these changes in accessibility can't be just completely implemented in new versions of Firefox but are under development. We cannot assume that they are being implemented as they are for lack of prior planning. The article Implies that their implementation is in some way, part of their development. We see constant examples of programs becoming inaccessible or less accessible in new versions.
We see constant examples of accessibility being added after a program is released rather than being developed with the program. That doesn't mean that we should assume a reflexive attitude that every such seeming occurrence is one. This case may be an exception that people will be very glad of as things develop.

In addition, people can experiment with new versions of Firefox and use the ESR version on the same machine without losing access to either whenever they wish. Use the portable versions of both or the installed version of one and the portable version of the other.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Brian's Mail list account via Groups.Io
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2017 2:55 AM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox 57 etc


All very well, but you forget all the masses of exploits used in other
software. I'm also saying this, if somebody said that this' ere screen
dis[play is a way in to Firefox lets make it invisible then it would not be
changed to stop the exploit. That is the thrust I'm going for.
Unfortunately it is a known fact that any code will have ways to get in
and exploit it. Everything man or woman does has an up side and a down side
as there are always crooks around.
However these issues have been around for years and years and nobody did
sod all about it, till recently, and now its a mess because they did not
actually think about it they simply did a fix and we have to take the left
overs till they fix it for us.

Lets hope that checkbox does end up unchecked in the release version as I
could not even find it so how con one alter it, I know! Hack the registry!
grin.
Brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Isige" <gwynn@tds.net>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2017 1:57 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox 57 etc


Ah. Rhetoric. Like this.


http://blog.trendmicro.com/mozilla-firefox-exploit-enlists-pcs-advanced-botnet/


And this:


https://www.welivesecurity.com/2015/08/11/firefox-under-fire-anatomy-of-latest-0-day-attack/


The reason you're not hacked any more than other people is because
Firefox updates for security, i.e. the very thing people are complaining
about now because it's updating in a way that happens to mess with
screen readers. It's true that, so far as I know, neither of these
injection attacks are the kind of code injection screen readers do.
That's because screen readers are local though and not using something
like JavaScript, but that's about the only difference. And you should
particularly note from the second link that the particular code
injection attack being discussed there allows reading and writing of
local files as well as uploading them. Have a credit card number written
down somewhere for easy access? Get infected by that thing and it could
very well be uploaded to a site for somebody else to try and use.


My point is, injection attacks happen, they're bad, and this is another
way to try and stop them. There's a real purpose to this change, whether
or not anybody happens to like or agree with it. It's not just rhetoric,
there are real examples of it, as I've just demonstrated. There's also a
way for screen readers to deal with browsers that doesn't involve code
injection, I believe this is how NVDA deals with Microsoft Edge because
Edge doesn't allow code injection. That's also part of why everybody's
still working on Edge accessibility, sure, that way doesn't materialize
overnight, it has to be implemented and I'm sure issues have to be
worked out with it, e.g. if a browser needs to expose certain things it
doesn't currently.


I get that the change Firefox is making isn't ideal for us, I'm just
saying, there's a reason for it, and there are a lot of alternatives to
using the new Firefox, including an older accessible version of Firefox
if you don't feel like trying to change browsers and use Chrome or Edge
until better accessibility for the new version of Firefox is worked out.
There's no reason to assume that the sky is falling and that nothing
will ever get better because clearly, Firefox is going down the road of
hating blind people and ignoring them entirely and thus we're all crewed.


On 11/4/2017 19:13, Ron Canazzi wrote:
Hi John,


Besides all that rhetoric, Mozilla has set the 'disable all
accessibility features' item to unchecked by default. As long as you
don't turn it on by accident, there shouldn't be any problem. I don't
know what the chance of you getting infected or hacked by something is
when this item is turned off, but I would imagine it isn't very high
because I don't see any greater number of blind people getting hacked
proportionately than sighted folks. Still there is an issue with
security now of days and it probably won't get any better for years.
Some people have already tested 57 with screen readers and were
careful not to check the box and things seem reasonably good.



On 11/4/2017 6:08 PM, John Isige wrote:
If you'd read all of the stuff in Freedom Scientific's post, you would
have seen this link.


https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/



Code injection is a horrible idea from a security standpoint and also a
coding one. It was something that was necessary back in the day, but
probably isn't anymore. So that was a change that probably should have
happened long before now anyway. It makes sense as a change and it was
going to cause this issue whenever it happened. Not only do we have
several accessible browsers to choose from, we have an accessible
version of the one with the problem and one assumes work will be done to
make the current version accessible. Seriously, do you people do
anything other than bitch about stuff? I'm beginning to wonder. I get
that the transition is annoying, sure. but some times there are actually
good reasons to change things, however annoying the transition happens
to be, and honestly, this one isn't all that bad in the grand scheme of
things.


On 11/4/2017 4:14, Brian's Mail list account via Groups.Io wrote:
Indeed, However I am critical of Mozillas handling of this. Its not
often that the makers of Jaws put up a page about the pitfalls and
also criticise a particular company for being unthinking about their
policy toward the VI community.

Let us hope that somebody in the management at that organisation takes
us more seriously, however I'm not holding my breath, and I'm not sure
if jamie working for them will help much if the culture is going down
the road toward making all software inaccessible to stop hacking. He
is probably not the most tactful person in the world as indeed neither
am I. I can now afford to grow old disgracefully. Age has its
advantages as history does tend to repeat itself and we have all been
here before, sadly.
Brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
----- Original Message ----- From: "никита тарасов"
<ntarasov29@gmail.com>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2017 6:41 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox 57 etc



Hello. I don't think it's worth installing Mozila 57 until she's fully
available to NVDA.
Отправлено из Почты для Windows 10

От: Brian's Mail list account via Groups.Io
Отправлено: 3 ноября 2017 г. в 21:17
Кому: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Тема: Re: [nvda] Firefox 57 etc

Yes I saw a message on the issues list from James, about some fixing
for
version 58, so maybe it will get resolved from the currently unusable
state.
Its new users of any screenreader I feel sorry for, especially where
its a
shared machine and the sighted member just lets firefox update.
There are a couple of other issues. It disabled both my add ons,
navigational sounds and Ublock Origin ad blocker and even when I put
the
version 52 back on I had to re download both add ons and install them
again.
Not only that but nvda after the update could not read the screen of
the add
ons manager, I had to exit firefox completely and go back in again to
see
if they had installed correctly, I'm sure this was not the case prior
to up
and down dating the version I had, which was 55. How also does one set
52 to
get security updates without letting it update to 57 as I see it wants
to do
till I set updates to no, ie not recommended.
Brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Mendoza"
<lowvisiontek@gmail.com>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2017 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox 57 etc


Hi, Brian


I have the same issue on the other machine, and that is the reason
why I
keep to shift instead to use the Firefox ESR version 52 but for now I
will
stick to this version because there is likely more stable in
performance
and never has a problem. And, once the issue has fix maybe I could go
for
to use and test it again.


Robert Mendoza

On 11/3/2017 6:00 PM, Brian's Mail list account via Groups.Io wrote:
With regard to this version of Firefox, and in addition to what
Joseph
posted about it. Here is what me acting as the average unaware
updater
found.
After installation only the menus work, no content on the page is
readable, you cannot go into any browse or focus mode. You just here
unknown.
Now there may well be some kind of setting that can be altered, I do
not
know, to achieve what he got, slow but functioning. I could not find
any
option for this. Not only that but it seemed to lose almost half
of my
bookmarks as well.

So unless they fix this on the release version anyone trying to use
Firefox 57 when it comes out with the latest version of nvda, and I
am up
to date with the master branch here, will not be able to do so unless
they know how to make it work.
If these people are employees then they will probably need the
permission
of an admin to reinstall a version like 55, and turn off auto
updates. I
have reinstalled 52 in actual fact and got my bookmarks back as
well as
functionality. To my mind the makers of Firefox at the current
state of
play should be able to see if screenreading software is on a machine
in a
similar way to Adobe reader or Jarte does, and prevent it from
updating
to an unworkable version.
I cannot understand why they have not done this.

Anyone care to comment?
Brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.













Join nvda@nvda.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.